Off topic posts from "Getting them to Reveal their Vitals"

[star_scream]

I've been reading this thread with interest but still do not understand the purpose of the CPR 31.14.

 

They willhave to prodcue the originals in court anyway won't they?

They are not going to send the originals in response to this letter?

If they have already sent a copy of the agreement, why would you ask for a copy of the same?

Sorry for being a bit thick, but I need to understand this as Amex have taken me to court and are to produce a copy of the original agreement , taken out in Nov 200 with £12 default charges photocopied on the back.

How would this cpr letter help me?

[MAGDA]

I've been reading this thread with interest but still do not understand the purpose of the CPR 31.14.

 

They willhave to prodcue the originals in court anyway won't they?

They are not going to send the originals in response to this letter?

If they have already sent a copy of the agreement, why would you ask for a copy of the same?

Sorry for being a bit thick, but I need to understand this as Amex have taken me to court and are to produce a copy of the original agreement , taken out in Nov 200 with £12 default charges photocopied on the back.

How would this cpr letter help me?

 

It is basically to prompt disclosure of documents which are mentioned in the POC (although I requested disclosure of a document (documents) which were mentioned in the claimants response to my defence, and it was effective in this situation also). If you already have the agreement, which the claimant is stating is a true copy of the agreement, then you are already in a position to assess the validity of this document. However, if for example the claimant has referred to a DN being issued by the OC, but hasn't provided it, or any proof that it was indeed served, then you can use cpr 31.14 to your advantage to request disclosure. As you say, the original agreement should be available at the hearing. However, if the claimant has not disclosed documents which may be crucial to your defence, it it far better to have sight of these earlier rather than later and in actual fact the claimant may not have the document at all. This is where 31.14 comes in. If you are actually contesting the authenticity of an agreement then it would be necessary to do so under a CPR 32.19 notice. This is my understanding of the process only. Magda

Edited November 24, 2008 by MAGDA
typo

[citizenB]

 

Sorry for being a bit thick, but I need to understand this as Amex have taken me to court and are to produce a copy of the original agreement , taken out in Nov 200 with £12 default charges photocopied on the back.

How would this cpr letter help me?

 

You have left off the last figure in the date for when your account was opened. £12.00 default charges came into force sometime during 2006. So if your account was opened before then, those charges could not have applied to your account at time of opening.

[star_scream]

You have left off the last figure in the date for when your account was opened. £12.00 default charges came into force sometime during 2006. So if your account was opened before then, those charges could not have applied to your account at time of opening.

I understand that citizen, but how can I prove it? They have a copy with my signature on and these charges on the back. Unless I can get a copy of charges dated Nov 2000 , I don't see much hope.

 

Also HSBC have issued court summons for just over £8K. They have not supplied a cca even though numerous requests have been sent. If I send a 31.14 in and they send it to me then, how does this help me? How can they issue summons when they have not supplied a CCA?

[Docman]

You have left off the last figure in the date for when your account was opened. £12.00 default charges came into force sometime during 2006. So if your account was opened before then, those charges could not have applied to your account at time of opening.

 

CB, does any one know when the OFT came out with the £12 limit and direct me to the source.

 

I've just had the terms & conditions sent to me in one of my cases where I took the card out in 1999. The OC says these were the ones valid then. Needless to say, the ones are unsigned and state the £12 limit. I beleive they are false but i want to be able to state in my defence when the chnages occured and then hit the OC where it hurts.

[MAGDA]

I understand that citizen, but how can I prove it? They have a copy with my signature on and these charges on the back. Unless I can get a copy of charges dated Nov 2000 , I don't see much hope.

 

Also HSBC have issued court summons for just over £8K. They have not supplied a cca even though numerous requests have been sent. If I send a 31.14 in and they send it to me then, how does this help me? How can they issue summons when they have not supplied a CCA?

 

When was your agreement actually taken out, was it 2000? - you don't need a copy of the charges relevant to 2000 as the OFT guidance in relation to charges came in much later anyway. If the charges are detailed as £12 then you can be pretty certain this is just a copy of the current T&Cs, as they would have been much higher at the time your agreement started. The reverse of the document you have has obviously been reconstructed in this way to make it appear as a single document. Does the front page, signature part, have any of the prescribed terms on it - if it does, then it could be enforceable, if it doesn't then it isn't.

 

As far as HSBC goes, if you send a cpr request and they provide the agreement this helps you by giving you the opportunity to examine the document in advance and look at potential loop holes that you can use in your defence, either that, or theywill have to tell you that they don't have it. If you do nothing, they could end up providing the document at the 11th hour, I've known of people on the forum who received disclosure the night before a hearing, in which case you would not have the opportunity to defend it. Magda

[lexis200]

Docman - do you have any details on the agreement they've sent (ie do you have an agreement and they direct you to terms on another page)? If so, can you tally the two, so say your agreement states something like 'see 3.2 on your terms', do you actually have a 3.2 on the terms they've sent?

 

Failing that, do you have any statements at all from earlier on in your account that you could check the charges on? If the charges are different, then the ones they've sent couldn't be valid. That is unless your OC was the only one who didn't charge upwards of £20 for late payments etc before the £12 ones came in:D

 

Star_Scream - unless your old statements show £12 as being the charge when you opened your account, the terms they have sent are recent. They can't argue this point, as it will be in black and white. It sounds like they've got the front of an agreement for you, and shoehorned any old terms on the back, but they need to be relevant to the account when it opened.

 

Otherwise, they could have bought in any old terms in the meantime and say that you agreed to them.

[lexis200]

Snap Magda:D

[MAGDA]

CB, does any one know when the OFT came out with the £12 limit and direct me to the source.

 

I've just had the terms & conditions sent to me in one of my cases where I took the card out in 1999. The OC says these were the ones valid then. Needless to say, the ones are unsigned and state the £12 limit. I beleive they are false but i want to be able to state in my defence when the chnages occured and then hit the OC where it hurts.

 

I believe oft changes to credit card charges was around April 2006. See attached article.

OFT says credit card charges are 'unfair'

 

If your t&cs are showing charges of £12, you can be certain they are not those from 1999. The charges at this time were usually much higher.

 

Hope this helps,

 

Magda

[MAGDA]

Snap Magda:D

 

Great minds think alike

[citizenB]

You have left off the last figure in the date for when your account was opened. £12.00 default charges came into force sometime during 2006. So if your account was opened before then, those charges could not have applied to your account at time of opening.

 

CB, does any one know when the OFT came out with the £12 limit and direct me to the source.

 

I've just had the terms & conditions sent to me in one of my cases where I took the card out in 1999. The OC says these were the ones valid then. Needless to say, the ones are unsigned and state the £12 limit. I beleive they are false but i want to be able to state in my defence when the chnages occured and then hit the OC where it hurts.

 

Docman, the link

 

http://www.oft.gov.uk/shared_oft/reports/financial_products/oft842a.pdf

 

The £12.00 charge came into force April 2006. So any terms and conditions that has £12.00 on them pre 2006 is NOT correct.

Edited November 25, 2008 by citizenB

[citizenB]

I understand that citizen, but how can I prove it? They have a copy with my signature on and these charges on the back. Unless I can get a copy of charges dated Nov 2000 , I don't see much hope.

 

Also HSBC have issued court summons for just over £8K. They have not supplied a cca even though numerous requests have been sent. If I send a 31.14 in and they send it to me then, how does this help me? How can they issue summons when they have not supplied a CCA?

 

Okey dokey,

 

1) does your agreement/application form have the PRESCRIBED terms on the part you have signed ?.

 

2) It is fairly obvious that the OC has photocopied CURRENT terms and conditions on to the back of an agreement/application form. I dont think you will find this is acceptable. £12.00 charges did not come into play until 2006, therefore there is NO way they could find their way onto the back of your document... signed or unsigned.

 

If HSBC have been unable to supply any document at all, then chances are they dont have one. I agree, how can they bring a claim against you without the document, it is my understanding that unless they have a copy with your signature on it, then they wont get very far in court.

[MAGDA]

Okey dokey,

 

1) does your agreement/application form have the PRESCRIBED terms on the part you have signed ?.

 

2) It is fairly obvious that the OC has photocopied CURRENT terms and conditions on to the back of an agreement/application form. I dont think you will find this is acceptable. £12.00 charges did not come into play until 2006, therefore there is NO way they could find their way onto the back of your document... signed or unsigned.

 

If HSBC have been unable to supply any document at all, then chances are they dont have one. I agree, how can they bring a claim against you without the document, it is my understanding that unless they have a copy with your signature on it, then they wont get very far in court.

 

Fantasy is certainly getting plenty of help today

[star_scream]

Fantasy is certainly getting plenty of help today

What does that mean Magda?

[tiokim]

I am wondering if I have done the right thing by asking Restons to provide a copy of my agreement before filing my defense under a CPR 31.14 considering that I am admitting having a copy sent by the OC but have doubts about the integrity of it?? Probably will get another letter saying your request is not appropriate

[MAGDA]

What does that mean Magda?

 

Sorry should have said "Star Scream" not fantasy, Magda

[citizenB]

I am wondering if I have done the right thing by asking Restons to provide a copy of my agreement before filing my defense under a CPR 31.14 considering that I am admitting having a copy sent by the OC but have doubts about the integrity of it?? Probably will get another letter saying your request is not appropriate

 

What you have actually asked for in this recent letter is sight of the document they intend to rely on in court Then pointed out the copy they have sent you could present them with problems if you were to question it.

[star_scream]

Sorry should have said "Star Scream" not fantasy, Magda

mmmm......

much more than a typo that magda wasn't it?

[MAGDA]

mmmm......

much more than a typo that magda wasn't it?

 

Sorry star scream, but what is that supposed to mean?

[star_scream]

Sorry star scream, but what is that supposed to mean?

Just wondering if you meant to type star scream, how it managed to come out as fantasy

 

Maybe there is a hidden meaning behind fantasy and not what you are suggesting?

[pt2537]

Just wondering if you meant to type star scream, how it managed to come out as fantasy

 

Maybe there is a hidden meaning behind fantasy and not what you are suggesting?

ever heard of the user FANTASY CHARGES?

[MAGDA]

Just wondering if you meant to type star scream, how it managed to come out as fantasy

 

Maybe there is a hidden meaning behind fantasy and not what you are suggesting?

 

No, I was just thinking of fantasy charges for some reason when I posted that reply and simply mixed the two user names up in my head. There certainly wasn't any hidden meaning - I would never be unpleasant to anyone on this forum and in fact earlier in the thread I had tried to offer some help. The reference referred to the fact that three people had all replied with exactly the same answer and was simply meant as a joke following on from lexis post, when he and I answered at the same time.

 

ever heard of the user FANTASY CHARGES?

 

Thank you pt.

[pt2537]

No, I was just thinking of fantasy charges for some reason when I posted that reply and simply mixed the two user names up in my head. There certainly wasn't any hidden meaning - I would never be unpleasant to anyone on this forum and in fact earlier in the thread I had tried to offer some help. The reference referred to the fact that three people had all replied with exactly the same answer and was simply meant as a joke following on from lexis post, when he and I answered at the same time.

 

 

 

Thank you pt.

Youre Welcome MAGDA, it sprang to mind that was who you meant:)

[MAGDA]

Youre Welcome MAGDA, it sprang to mind that was who you meant:)

 

must be old age creeping in:smile:

[star_scream]

ever heard of the user FANTASY CHARGES?

No I haven't.